My Rebuttal to:

The Real Cost of Net Zero: The shocking truth of the renewable energy push.

https://youtu.be/YbxpieEQ7bc?si=ovHNtUlcwE43Apdj

All good arguments should show the alternative. So one of the alternatives to not having solor and wind would be to burn more coal. What would the result of that have been? And what happens in the future when all the coal is burnt?

Ther are other renewables that hardly anybody talks about. One is tidel. Unlike solor and wind, tides are predictable for a long time into the future

Yet another form of renewable is geothermal. The technology exists to drill down to where underground heat is so hot that it can convert water to steam the same way that present coal fired power stations use steam to run generators.

Tidel and geothermal are just 2 alternatives to the supposed issue of base load. Why arent they put forward?

If you say cost, you may wish to read about Modern monetary theory:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_monetary_theory

Consider that more profit can be made by creating problems than solving them